I'm a college student who earns through commercial photo and video work. Lately the jobs requiring video are paying way more than photo work so I'm seriously considering investing in a system that will fullfil my needs as a videographer better than my D7000.
Initially I wanted full frame because of the low light performance, no crop factor adjustment to think about (since my lenses are for 35mm), and just better image quality in general. But since I can't afford the D800 or the Canon 5d mkIII, the only ones available that's close to my budget is the Canon 6d and the Nikon D600. Again I come from a Nikon system (I prefer their ergonomics and think Canon's "better" video is a myth if you know how to use light right), so the 6d (or any Canon) is out of the question.
But then here comes the GH3 with the high bit-rate video recording capabilities, 1080p at 60fps, short flange focal distance which means I can adapt way more third party lenses (like M42 mount) to it than my Nikon D7000, and it's under 1500 usd.It seriously got me thinking.
So basically I need a camera that's under 2000 usd that's great at both stills and video, but really shines on the latter since it's what pays more. Those are my two choices. I might sell my D7000 to be able to afford it which means if the GH3 is the better choice, I might be jumping ship to that system instead.
I know there's a bit of a price difference but I already own several Nikon lenses and no Panasonic meaning if I were to compare getting a GH3 + lenses to a D600 body they would be about the same price.
>>> Panasonic GH3 or Nikon D600?